TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1975 (8) TMI 146
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....date that the appeal be treated as a revision petition and considered accordingly. On that application an objection was raised by counsel for the Respondents that the judgment having been dictated orally in open court it had become final and could not now be reconsidered. The question is whether a judgment in such circumstances is final and cannot subsequently be withdrawn, altered or modified before it is signed and sealed. 3. Before considering the different aspects of the question, reference may be made to certain statutory provisions. Order 20 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure provides that after the case has been heard the Court shall pronounce judgment in open court, either at once or on some future date. Order 20 Rule 3 requir....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f the Bench which heard the appeal, be deemed to be minutes merely and not judgments. This rule applies where before the judgment could be delivered some of the Judges had ceased to be Judges of the court. It is not relevant to the point before me. 4. The cases cited before me may be considered now. In one of the earlier cases, Firm Gokal Chandjagan Nath v. Firm Nand Ram Dass Atma Ram A.I.R. 1938 P C 292 the Judicial Committee held that a judgment delivered in court was an operative judgment although one of the judges had omitted to sign it. It was a case where one of the Judges had signed the judgment while the other had proceeded on leave without signing it. All that flows from the opinion of the Judicial Committee is that the judgment....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Madho Prasad Singh v. Adit and Ors. A.I.R. 1953 All. 416 where a division Bench held that in a civil case a judgment delivered in open court and dictated to a shorthand writer before the transcription of the same was signed by the Judge or the Judges concerned did not become final until it had been signed and dated, and that it was open to the Judge or Judges to make such revision as may be deemed necessary before signing and dating it. Reference was made to a number of cases Pragmadho Singh v. Emperor A.I.R. 1933 All. 40, Saru-Smalting and Refining Corporation Ltd. Meerut v. State A.I.R. 1951 All. 709, Queen Empress v. Lalit Tiwari I.L.R. 21 All. 177, Emperor v. Kallu I.L.R. 27 All. 92, Emperor v. Govind Sahai A.I.R. 1916 All. 183 and Sta....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Court could set aside the order and rehear the case. Clearly that was a case where an error of the court itself was required to be set right in the exercise of the inherent jurisdiction of the court. 15. Subsequently a Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court in Faulad and Anr. v. State A.I.R. 1961 All. 326 expressed the view that even in a criminal case a judgment dictated in court was a provisional one only and that it was open to the judge to alter the judgment and dictate a fresh judgment before it was signed and sealed. 7. A point similar to the one arising in the present case was considered by a Full Bench of the Allahabad High Court in Sangam Lal v. Rent Controller and Eviction Officer, Allahabad and Ors. A.I.R. 1966 A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y the Court of Appeal in England in Millensted v. Crosvenor House (Park Lane), Ltd. (1937) 1 All. E.R. 736, and reliance was Placed on Re Sufield & Watts (1888) 20 Q.B D 693. 697. The same principle was applied by the Court of Appeal in Moon Motors Ltd. v. Kinan Wou (1952) 2 LR 80. In England, an order becomes finally effective when it is perfected by its being passed and entered. In Re: Thorns (1911) 2 Ch. 389, warrington J. observed: It is the every day practice that, until an order is passed and entered, the matter can be brought before the Judge, and if a mistake has been made it can be put right. And further I think that is the correct way of dealing with the matter for the reason that, until the order is fin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....are spoken. But that is not so in the case of an order which can only be treated as operative "at the expense of making it, in effect, irrevocable, e. g.,an order for the payment of money, cannot be treated as operative until it has been passed and entered". The Court of Appeal In Re Harrison's Settlement (Supra) declared that it would be more reasonable, and better for the parties, if the Judge, on realising that the decision pronounced was wrong recalled it and reheard the case rather than allowed the matter to be perfected with the knowledge that the order as orally pronounced was founded on a misconception. The alternative, it was pointed out, is that: no matter how clearly it might appear that the Judge's order as oral....